FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Antiquity of the Book of Abraham"
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) |
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
{{:Question: Since the papyri from which the Book of Abraham was translated date to the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, does this mean that the events recorded in the Book of Abraham have no possibility of being genuinely related to a historical Abraham?}} | {{:Question: Since the papyri from which the Book of Abraham was translated date to the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, does this mean that the events recorded in the Book of Abraham have no possibility of being genuinely related to a historical Abraham?}} | ||
{{:Source:Gospel Topics:Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham:Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham}} | {{:Source:Gospel Topics:Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham:Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham}} | ||
| + | {{endnotes sources}} | ||
Revision as of 20:03, 29 October 2019
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Preservation of the Ancient Core of the Book of Abraham
Summary: The papyri from which the Book of Abraham date to between 300 BCE - 100 AD. Some have asked how a story about Abraham, who is claimed to live in the year 2000 BCE, can possibly retain an ancient core given the long amount of time it would have to survive scribal transmission. These articles explore these charges.
Jump to details:
- Question: Since the papyri from which the Book of Abraham was translated date to the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, does this mean that the events recorded in the Book of Abraham have no possibility of being genuinely related to a historical Abraham?
- Source:Gospel Topics:Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham:Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham
{{:Question: Since the papyri from which the Book of Abraham was translated date to the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, does this mean that the events recorded in the Book of Abraham have no possibility of being genuinely related to a historical Abraham?}}
Gospel Topics on LDS.org: "Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham"
"Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham," Gospel Topics on LDS.org:
The discovery of the papyrus fragments renewed debate about Joseph Smith’s translation. The fragments included one vignette, or illustration, that appears in the book of Abraham as facsimile 1. Long before the fragments were published by the Church, some Egyptologists had said that Joseph Smith’s explanations of the various elements of these facsimiles did not match their own interpretations of these drawings. Joseph Smith had published the facsimiles as freestanding drawings, cut off from the hieroglyphs or hieratic characters that originally surrounded the vignettes. The discovery of the fragments meant that readers could now see the hieroglyphs and characters immediately surrounding the vignette that became facsimile 1.
None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.[1]—(Click here to continue)
Notes
- ↑ "Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham," Gospel Topics (8 July 2014)